Comment

Release date was in February and on Valentines day weekend. Safe to say, people were at the theater. The other option that weekend was Confessions of a Shopaholic and NO ONE saw that.

Oddly enough, there were 3 Friday's that year too.

First of all, wrong movie. TCM3D was what I was referring to.

But now you're going to boil it down to speculative bullshit over how exactly Friday performed well? Based on it's lack of competition? Well gee, that's nice and all but I already touched on that multiple times. It came out in a cinematic drought, which frankly is one of the best time for horror movies to even come out (October is probably the best) if they want any chance of doing well.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre is another franchise that doesn't play by the same rules. If that same exact film wasn't released until 2009, it would have been fine.

No, if it were released today it would be seen as derivative and trite. Marcus Nispel struck a certain style with that film that was actually kinda neat at first, but nowadays it's been emulated and done to death.

Which is actually the reason people give it a pass. It was the first to attempt what it tried to do, so people were interested and didn't have much of anything else like it.

Funny thing is I actually used to like the TCM remake...until I rewatched it again circa 2009-2010. It just seemed boring and dull, not to mention my personal reason for disliking it also include them royally fucking the character of LeatherJason--er, sorry Leatherface. Yeah, you can change the name to "Hewit" or whatever all you want, but if you're remaking the original film and reimagining the character of Leatherface, I'm going to naturally compare him to the 74 original, and when I did I was not amused.

Still stands above the rest of the remake heap with Dawn of the Dead as one of the worthwhile attempts.

No, the Dawn remake is actually quality shit. It even stands tall as a strong film despite my extreme hatred of Running Zombies.

Friday released on a busier weekend than TCM and had 0 competition in the box office.

Oh please. TCM is a franchise that will absolutely stand tall during the month of Halloween and you know it.

More than likely you'll boil it down to two decisions, Kill Bill or TCM, and considering they were a week apart, there was hardly any reason you couldn't see both. Add to that the month being October (practically horror movie season), TCM having an established fanbase with a movie that looked fresh and new, and it becomes painfully obvious that TCM was poised to do well.

TCM came out the same week MYSTIC RIVER went out for a wide release. And do you remembah how much people loved that fawking movie!??!

Christ almighty which TCM are you talking about here?

That's nice. Means jack shit. RT wasn't around when any of those film came out so how accurate can those numbers even be? Films released now get a live reaction which makes it somewhat of a good thermometer, but it's not the final word on anything.

It's funny how it means jack shit when it shows you just how full of shit your little crusade is to shoot down a horror movie reboot. If anything, those films would theoretically be saved by the nostalgia, but no...not even one of my personal favorites, New Blood is safe. What it does prove however, is that modern audiences at least thought of the reboot pretty much the same as they do the old films. In other words, the reboot is pretty run of the mill. Which I'm fine with. I enjoyed the classic premise as a nice break from all the wacky shit we got from the last 3 movies.

If Friday would have released a stand alone remake in 2003 instead of FvJ it wouldn't have done as well. It would have been on the coat tails of Jason X and no doubt people would have turned away.

Aside from the fact that you have "zero" basis for this, we could also imagine how it would have done had Jason X not even existed around that time in a similar setting to TCM'09, which hadn't had an entry for ages. In that particular scenario it would have done extremely well, if not better than TCM given that people generally think of F13, or rather Jason Voorhees, as the ultimate slasher. But given the cinematic environment it did eventually get released in, it didn't fare quite as well for obvious reasons....but still did more than well enough.

In fact it begs the question, why exactly did the producers choose to release the film in it's cinematic drought rather than a summer release similar to TCM'03? And my answer to that would be that they knew reboots weren't the hot shit they were back when TCM's remake was released.

The only thing that would have saved it is if it was a decent enough film to generate word of mouth buzz. 2009 was surely not one of those.

Yet it still did pretty fucking well for itself....are we forgetting this?

Now, you could argue that if JX and JGTH never happened that a remake in 2003 would have been insane.

Yeah...I just did. What you're describing is sequel fati----

Wait, so you mean to tell me that SEQUEL fatigue, you're perfectly willing to believe in, but REMAKE fatigue is bullshit? Christ, what a joke this conversation has become.

I know the story and you are telling it wrong.

Actually I didn't tell the story. I only paid minuscule attention to it in the first place, and before I knew it Paramount were the owners again.

If in 2009 WB, acting as the distributor during this time, thought the sequel would have made money they wouldn't have passed on it. PD tried to fast track it but the script never got a go.

That sequel had one shot and between another Shannon and Swift draft and poor word of mouth it never had a chance. After they got rejected, PD had to go make their other films and by the time they got back around to F13th it was on the selling block so WB could take sole credit for Interstellar.

Now New Line's grubby little sausage fingers are off the project and maybe that is the ultimate victory in this scenario.

From Wikiland

In a later interview, Fuller explained that the making of the 2009 remake was a joint effort by Paramount and New Line, who both own portions of the Friday the 13th franchise. With the economy down, both studios are limiting the films that they produce each year, opting for lower risks and higher rewards. As such, films like Friday the 13th Part 2 were put on hold, with the hope that when the economy bounced back, they would move forward with the next installment. Form explained that since neither studio wants to walk away from the production of a sequel and have it perform well without their involvement, thus making them look like "idiots", the chance of having one studio being the primary producing house was rejected. Form and Fuller also mentioned that the Friday the 13th sequel may be a 3‑D film, should it ever get the green light for production.[74] On February 1, 2011, it was reported that a script for a sequel had been completed. Brad Fuller states that he is ready when New Line Cinema is ready

Maybe this new film will be called TCM: BACK TO THE ROOTZ w/ Cuz & the gang!!

Pls stop trying to funny. U can't funny.

What you are saying sounds more like the natural progression of decently made product. Hit it big with the first and ride that puppy as long as you can.

Which F13 was trying to do if PD had their way...but due to the reasons stated above it was essentially put into a state of limbo.

Friday the 13th is still searching for it's new franchise angle. But who knows, after a couple really good ones maybe they'll finally make that Jason X sequel you've been waiting for.

Oh god I hope so.

Word of mouth and poor projections. Drop off numbers scared WB away and if they had any confidence in that crew being able to rebound they would have dropped the cash.

Really? Where's your proof for this? Link me bitch.

I said TCM3D is so bad it's good? In the 2/3 ration I mentioned, that was the unwatchable one although I did show up to the theater upon release.

I didn't say you said that. It was a pre-emptive reply for just in case you tried pulling that shit for why it did pretty well in the theater.

But why not? There is enough history now in the series to go back and make better stories. I mean, Do you think the original marvel comics were really that great? I've read a few from some of the great series and they were pretty stupid, but you know nostalgia! Right?

Why not? Because ultimately F13 is still a slasher franchise, and since when have these things ever had a good track record for "stories"? Ordering that F13 must be the one to stand tall and rise above that status quo is kind of a tall fucking order considering the very franchises existence owes itself to the likes of John Carpenter's Halloween and Mario Bava's Twitch of the Death Nerve AKA Bay of Blood. The franchise has pretty much thrived off of being Run of the Mill and having a cool killer. I expect good story from Halloween (which we haven't had since H20 and back with that film we hadn't seen one since 88's Halloween 4), I even expect a decent story during Texas Chainsaw, Nightmare on Elm Street, and Hellraiser. Friday the 13th though? Um, no.

But as classic as those comics are, why is it that they keep basing the recent films on the more seriously toned graphic novels that were written many years after the originals. Probably because those novels contain more in depth and well thought out storylines than their cheeky predecessors.

Uh very often it's because graphic novel storylines lend themselves better to film. Has a lot less to do with quality. Batman has had some absolutely amazing comic book runs, as has the likes of Spider-Man. But Nolan and crew picked most of their storypoints from the likes of The Killing Joke and The Long Halloween, which created a more comprehensive and well rounded story. Spider-Man very often seems to follow the actual comics, and as such the films aren't always that great as a result of simply cramming to many story points and villains into one film creating a convoluted mess. And that's only skimming the issue..for another thread entirely I'm afraid.

I'm not saying F13th has to be high art and bring home an Emmy, but much like what Marvel has done to their brand, it can do better.

Except they don't really have to in order to bring home a nice paycheck...

Now you're just rubbing salt in Jason's axe wound, not mine.

Nice try, but I'm actually pointing out that damn near anything can get a sequel if there's even a sliver of a chance of the producers making money off of it. Friday would have had no problem getting the greenlight as well if the unique situation surrounding didn't play out the way it did. A situation that the likes of even the shittiest of movie's that got sequels which ended up materializing never had to deal with.

It is and so is Friday the 13th: The New Beginning.

Oh, I just tried watching that earlier this month and ended up preferring a sledgehammer to the face.

Although I admit, it's almost worth it for "YOU TELL 'IM MA!" "Will you shut the fuck up?"

I do not feel pain from reading words nor do I when reading Rotten Tomato scores. All I was doing was pointing out your fluctuating standards.

Fluctuating standards? Que? All I did was point out a fact. That the opinion on the reboot stands as pretty divided, which again is par the course for these types of films. How exactly does this imply any sort of standard? You think I stand by these results as proof of their worth? Because I don't. I'm a realist and I know where the reboot stands with people around the world, and from my experience it mirrors that percentage pretty closely. About half like it, about half hate it. No more, no less. In fact on this very thread I had the exact same discussion (read ass stompin') with Freddy Lives when he tried to pull this consensus shit on me that the film was seen as trash with the fans, and in fact it was proven to be seen as trash by some, entertaining by others. Simple as that.

Not worried about the performance, worried bout the content. There is a difference. Right now I can't sit down and put on F132009 without wanting to turn it off half way through.

Yet there are thousands of people who can't even sit through part 1 because they think it's garbage. Subjective opinion works like that, and it varies greatly. And in the reboots case the majority is majorly lopsided on neither end of the spectrum.

Of course interest reignited when FvJ hit the theaters, that film was 15 years over due. It almost happened instead of JTM,

From my understanding it almost happened before that even. New Blood was initially supposed to be Freddy vs Jason but was reworked heavily with a girl with psychic powers taking Freddy's place.

so just imagine what that would have been like! Buechler Hodder Jason vs Englund in his prime Freddy.

Would have been amazing

But please, tell me you'd rather have Ronny Yu's take.

I quite love Yu's take actually. Was it my dream movie of how I thought it should have been? No. I was so bummed over losing Hodder, and I didn't quite like the lifelessness of Jason overall, but it was still pretty kickass and a fun ride.

Back to the point, cross over films will always rake in cash. Look at AvP.Those two films raked in 177, 128 million, and then generated interest back in their own franchises as well.

No disagreement there. Which was exactly my implication as to why Freddy vs Jason being the highest point of both franchises financially should be taken as is. Because essentially you're pulling off what is normally impossible with most other characters like rights and licenses, but also pulling int crowds from two entirely different franchises. They're real money makers for sure.

Most of what I talked about there was based on watching the Crystal Lake Memories doc, reading the book, and common sense.

*snort* common sense.

still searching.....aaaaaand nope. You still never quoted or replied to the section in the post where I covered design further. We did go back and forth about Godzilla but all we found out there was we are both on the same page.

I'm nearly insulted. Keep searchin...

That was nothing. I was up anyway watching Zombie because you posted that pic a while back and it had just been too long since I watched it.

Made me want to see Zombie Jason in action even more than I already did. Watching the infamous eye scene all I could think about was how good that scenario would be in a new Friday. Jason the undead corpse trying bash his way into a room of a helpless victim?

I think that's what makes those films so enjoyable at times. The zombies just don't bite people, but have the option to go borderline slasher on them.

Anyway now I'm rambling, where was I? Oh, well shit, I'm at the end of another waste of valuable time. Guess now I'm just going to have to go out and enjoy the rest of my Sunday.

Well then stop doing that because it really doesn't belong in this conversation and I'm not sure why you brought it up in the first place.

But now you're going to boil it down to speculative bullshit over how exactly Friday performed well? Based on it's lack of competition? Well gee, that's nice and all but I already touched on that multiple times. It came out in a cinematic drought, which frankly is one of the best time for horror movies to even come out (October is probably the best) if they want any chance of doing well.

No speculation here, Valentines Day is a great weekend to release. And with very little competition the date was chosen wisely.

The point I made was that the similar film TCM2003, not 3D, came out during a very crowded October and continued to do well for the weeks that followed even though there were other popular options.

Opening weekend it made 26.7m, lower than Friday, but then went on nice run to finish at 80.5m. 15m more than Friday, because, it's a better product.

No, if it were released today it would be seen as derivative and trite. Marcus Nispel struck a certain style with that film that was actually kinda neat at first, but nowadays it's been emulated and done to death.

Now who's the one speculating?

But seriously this part of our conversation is no longer worth the effort.

Which is actually the reason people give it a pass. It was the first to attempt what it tried to do, so people were interested and didn't have much of anything else like it.

People didn't 'give it a pass' because it was the first remake, they just simply enjoyed it.

TCM2003 and the Dawn remake are quality shit.

Fixed.

Oh please. TCM is a franchise that will absolutely stand tall during the month of Halloween and you know it.

Of course it will, never said it wouldn't. All I was saying is that TCM2003 had more / better options to compete with for general attendances and it still did very well for itself.

All, except HOTD, seem like worthwhile options for a general audience.

More than likely you'll boil it down to two decisions, Kill Bill or TCM, and considering they were a week apart, there was hardly any reason you couldn't see both. Add to that the month being October (practically horror movie season), TCM having an established fanbase with a movie that looked fresh and new, and it becomes painfully obvious that TCM was poised to do well.

Only 11% of general audiences see films more than twice in one month, or at least that's what the MPAA says:

More than two-thirds of the U.S./Canada population (68%) – or 227.8 million people – went to the movies at least once in 2013, consistent with prior years.

Ticket sales continue to be driven by frequent moviegoers who, by definition, attend movies once a month or more. In 2013, frequent moviegoers represented 11% of the population and 50% of all movie tickets, a decrease of 7 percentage points in ticket share from 2012, while ticket share of occasional moviegoers tickets increased by the same amount.

This suggests that the decrease in ticketsales in 2013 was among moviegoers who decreased their attendance to at least once a month from intervals of once a month or more in 2012. MPAA

Granted this is from 2013, but you get the point. Unless it's apart of the summer blockbuster season, a film cannot rely on general audiences seeing multiple films per month.

I would have given you the 2004 stats for a better reference but those attendance statistics were not included in that report

Online viewership could have had a drastic effect on those 2013 numbers to lower repeated monthly attendance, but there was plenty of torrenting back in 2003...just much slower.

Christ almighty which TCM are you talking about here?

TCM 2003, cuz.

It's funny how it means jack shit when it shows you just how full of shit your little crusade is to shoot down a horror movie reboot. If anything, those films would theoretically be saved by the nostalgia, but no...not even one of my personal favorites, New Blood is safe. What it does prove however, is that modern audiences at least thought of the reboot pretty much the same as they do the old films. In other words, the reboot is pretty run of the mill. Which I'm fine with. I enjoyed the classic premise as a nice break from all the wacky shit we got from the last 3 movies.

The difference here is that the Friday sequels of the 80's were given an insane turnaround deadline and forced to follow its preceding film with very little set up. By the time New Blood came around the rocket was running out of fuel.

In fact it begs the question, why exactly did the producers choose to release the film in it's cinematic drought rather than a summer release similar to TCM'03? And my answer to that would be that they knew reboots weren't the hot shit they were back when TCM's remake was released.

Their choices 2009 were February, March, and November, so they went for a Valentines Day release for the holiday crowd.

Yet it still did pretty fucking well for itself....are we forgetting this?

During a classic movie-date holiday weekend and with 0 competition and great marketing campaign. A great first weekend doesn't make it a good film. An 80% drop off is more telling and failing to cross 100 million worldwide puts it in closer proximity to Zombiween.

Yeah...I just did. What you're describing is sequel fati----

Wait, so you mean to tell me that SEQUEL fatigue, you're perfectly willing to believe in, but REMAKE fatigue is bullshit? Christ, what a joke this conversation has become.

There is a difference and I didn't say there is no such thing as remake fatigue. All I stated was the F13th wouldn't have fallen victim to it because it carries more pop culture weight with it that say The Wicker Man or Shutter's of the world.

And if you go back and look at my comment it also states that enough time had passed for audiences to get the taste Jason X out of their mouths, with a little help from FvJ of course.

Actually I didn't tell the story. I only paid minuscule attention to it in the first place, and before I knew it Paramount were the owners again.

From Wikiland

In a later interview, Fuller explained that the making of the 2009 remake was a joint effort by Paramount and New Line, who both own portions of the Friday the 13th franchise. With the economy down, both studios are limiting the films that they produce each year, opting for lower risks and higher rewards. As such, films like Friday the 13th Part 2 were put on hold, with the hope that when the economy bounced back, they would move forward with the next installment. Form explained that since neither studio wants to walk away from the production of a sequel and have it perform well without their involvement, thus making them look like "idiots", the chance of having one studio being the primary producing house was rejected. Form and Fuller also mentioned that the Friday the 13th sequel may be a 3‑D film, should it ever get the green light for production.[74] On February 1, 2011, it was reported that a script for a sequel had been completed. Brad Fuller states that he is ready when New Line Cinema is readyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friday_...hise%29#Future

That was the ultimate hold up our "Friday the 13th Snow Edition" always had. It wasn't lack of interest because of word of mouth or any kind of assumptions you can come up with. If TCM3D can get a sequel, then there was no reason to think that Friday '09's quality or entertainment quality was what killed it. You seem to have this illusion that quality is what talks...and that is 100% incorrect.

Which F13 was trying to do if PD had their way...but due to the reasons stated above it was essentially put into a state of limbo.

That's all well and good for the press release, but something went on there that lead to the ejection of Shannon and Swift and a start from scratch approach.

Not matter what PD thought, if the distributors, WB, NL, and Paramount (joint & solo), fully believed in Snow Day the 13th then they would have picked up on it when the funds were made available.

Really? Where's your proof for this? Link me bitch.

My proof is that Snow Day the 13th is not happening.

Why not? Because ultimately F13 is still a slasher franchise, and since when have these things ever had a good track record for "stories"? Ordering that F13 must be the one to stand tall and rise above that status quo is kind of a tall fucking order considering the very franchises existence owes itself to the likes of John Carpenter's Halloween and Mario Bava's Twitch of the Death Nerve AKA Bay of Blood. The franchise has pretty much thrived off of being Run of the Mill and having a cool killer. I expect good story from Halloween (which we haven't had since H20 and back with that film we hadn't seen one since 88's Halloween 4), I even expect a decent story during Texas Chainsaw, Nightmare on Elm Street, and Hellraiser. Friday the 13th though? Um, no.

I'm not asking Friday the 13th to reach into my soul and teach me the meaning of life. I'm asking it to entertain and scare me.

F132009 was paint by numbers horror and brought nothing new to the table. It just used a bunch of stale, predictable horror cliches and tried to make them feel new with slick, stylized camera work.

The original Friday the 13th actually has a decent story. It was not built to grow legs and run, but Mancuso and his EP team did the best they good with what they had for both time and money.

At this point I would like to add that F2016 looks like they are playing a better hand than 2009. They are taking their time, hiring some pretty talented horror people, and looking to create a film that focuses Jason's story a little more by exploring his undying ability.

You could say that 2009 did the same with his unexplained survival, but they never cracked the real conundrum of 'if he didn't drown, then what happened to him, and why do people think he drowned?"

Uh very often it's because graphic novel storylines lend themselves better to film. Has a lot less to do with quality. Batman has had some absolutely amazing comic book runs, as has the likes of Spider-Man. But Nolan and crew picked most of their storypoints from the likes of The Killing Joke and The Long Halloween, which created a more comprehensive and well rounded story. Spider-Man very often seems to follow the actual comics, and as such the films aren't always that great as a result of simply cramming to many story points and villains into one film creating a convoluted mess. And that's only skimming the issue..for another thread entirely I'm afraid.

The point is that the same story points are often retold from different perspectives and more often than not certain details change to make the story stronger. That's all I am asking instead of the weak set of cliff notes from the older films that bind F132009 together.

Except they don't really have to in order to bring home a nice paycheck...

No, Friday doesn't really have to try to bring home cash. The franchise alone is still a money making machine.

Still not an excuse to put together a a lackluster project. I think PD believes in what they did, or at least what they tried to do. I'd like to hear and interview with them about their real thoughts on the project and what they think they did right and wrong.

All the ingredients that made up F132009 were correct, but some how it came out over-stylized and under-baked.

Nice try, but I'm actually pointing out that damn near anything can get a sequel if there's even a sliver of a chance of the producers making money off of it. Friday would have had no problem getting the greenlight as well if the unique situation surrounding didn't play out the way it did. A situation that the likes of even the shittiest of movie's that got sequels which ended up materializing never had to deal with.

Still doesn't explain why they went back to square one. Projects get put on hold all the time, but that' usually never a good sign. Every project I've watched get put on hold usually ends with mass firings and a complete strategy change which is exactly what happened here.

Oh, I just tried watching that earlier this month and ended up preferring a sledgehammer to the face.

Although I admit, it's almost worth it for "YOU TELL 'IM MA!" "Will you shut the fuck up?"

"Cloudy in the mountains, sunny in the valleys, and snow flurries, up your nose....snnnnniiiiiiiffffffffff.....bulluluadadee" > All of F132009

Fluctuating standards? Que? All I did was point out a fact. That the opinion on the reboot stands as pretty divided, which again is par the course for these types of films. How exactly does this imply any sort of standard? You think I stand by these results as proof of their worth? Because I don't. I'm a realist and I know where the reboot stands with people around the world, and from my experience it mirrors that percentage pretty closely. About half like it, about half hate it. No more, no less. In fact on this very thread I had the exact same discussion (read ass stompin') with Freddy Lives when he tried to pull this consensus shit on me that the film was seen as trash with the fans, and in fact it was proven to be seen as trash by some, entertaining by others. Simple as that.

Still not a very good sign when your own fan base is split. The better films in the series have a pretty common consensus with the fans and that's the type of film I'm ultimately looking forward to.

And unlike you, I understand why people hate some of the films in the series I adore like New Beginning. When people say that movie sucks, I don't argue. The story is not executed to it's potential and there's a fake Jason. Even with that, there are some really enjoyable scenes and characters - both of which F132009 lacked completely.

Yet there are thousands of people who can't even sit through part 1 because they think it's garbage. Subjective opinion works like that, and it varies greatly. And in the reboots case the majority is majorly lopsided on neither end of the spectrum.

I think the Exorcist is the greatest comedy ever made, but I still have respect for the response it got when it came out. Same goes for the first Friday which is not my favorite entry, but ultimately responsible for this conversation.

From my understanding it almost happened before that even. New Blood was initially supposed to be Freddy vs Jason but was reworked heavily with a girl with psychic powers taking Freddy's place.

That is true, or at least, I know the buzz started sometime after Jason Lives and that Rob Hedden said that was his first choice before coming up with the idea of taking Jason out of Crystal Lake.

Would have been amazing

So would have the real Jason Take Manhattan and possibly Snow Day the 13th, but I guess we'll never know.

I quite love Yu's take actually. Was it my dream movie of how I thought it should have been? No. I was so bummed over losing Hodder, and I didn't quite like the lifelessness of Jason overall, but it was still pretty kickass and a fun ride.

Shit you just reminded me that I still have to read all those unused FvJ scripts.'

No disagreement there. Which was exactly my implication as to why Freddy vs Jason being the highest point of both franchises financially should be taken as is. Because essentially you're pulling off what is normally impossible with most other characters like rights and licenses, but also pulling int crowds from two entirely different franchises. They're real money makers for sure.

How Freddy vs Jason vs Ash never got made I will never know.

I'm nearly insulted. Keep searchin...

Long day, no time. Either BD is hiding another one of your posts on me or I'm losing the ability to care.

Comment

Nah, seriously I will get back to reading it, but I just obtained Bloodborne and I'm also still humoring Se7en in the game thread, so between those two things, I'll be super late responding to this due to limited time. So expect it.......soon......ish........kinda.

Right, 'cause the world is just buzzing about this 4th entry to an already tired franchise. I can't seem to go anywhere without hearing about Jurassic World. It's the next Hunger Games.

$30 - $40 million opening weekend if they're lucky, and then out of existence it will quickly go. Count on it.